Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Potency results on the repeated biotransformation #59

Open
david1597 opened this issue Aug 16, 2018 · 2 comments
Open

Potency results on the repeated biotransformation #59

david1597 opened this issue Aug 16, 2018 · 2 comments

Comments

@david1597
Copy link
Contributor

david1597 commented Aug 16, 2018

The potency results are back for batch number two of the Pfizer biosynthesis compound:

Originally made last year, that batch showed a potency of 6 nM. The organic chemistry lab synthesis of this compound ("The OHOH") was completed a couple of months ago (#36); coming back at 660 nM (#54).

The result of the repeated biosynthesis has come back with a potency of 115 nM. Again, this aspect of Series 4 isn't making things easy! We still plan to send the sample made in Sydney for a retest next we send off samples. We should also decide, over the coming weeks, what further actions to take in terms of overall direction in regards to this sector of Series 4.

@MFernflower
Copy link
Contributor

Random Q - Is it possible that our 6 nanomolar magic bullet was a para-hydroxy-phenyl OHOH compound? @david1597 @edwintse
magicbullet

@mattodd mattodd self-assigned this Sep 4, 2018
@mattodd
Copy link
Member

mattodd commented Sep 4, 2018

(Am back online - hello everyone. Will now catch up on everything OSM-related).
Thanks @david1597 . Do you have a link to the primary data, or were the data uploaded to ScienceCloud (in which case a screenshot can help)? Is 115 nM an average of runs?
Yes, we need to repeat the analysis of the Sydney-made compound. Can I check: the NMR data for the purified Sydney compound and the repeated Pfizer compound match, right? Do we have that NMR comparison anywhere (as we did for the original samples that did not match)? We'll need it for the S4 paper, on the assumption we include this. Obviously this would at the same time answer @MFernflower 's question above.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants